Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 5 March, 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Date of Decision : 05.03.2021

Jagpreet Singh and another. …Petitioners
State of Punjab and others ….Respondents

Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.S. Walia

Present : Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Gupta Advocate for
the petitioner.
Mr. Aditya Sharda, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sumit Rana, Advocate for Mr. Vikasdeep Singh, Advocate
for respondent No.2.

B.S. Walia, J.

1. Prayer in the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing

of FIR No.03 dated 02.01.2020, registered under Sections 498-A, IPC at

Police Station Sirhali, District Tarn Taran, and all consequential proceedings

emanating therefrom on the basis of compromise, Annexure P/2, dated


2. Learned counsel contends that respondent No.2 was married to

petitioner No.1 on 27.02.2019 but no child was born from the wedlock, that

relationship between the parties became strained due to incompatibility and

temperamental differences and petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 could

not adjust with each other, eventually leading to respondent No.2 registering

FIR No.03 dated 02.01.2020, under Sections 498-A, IPC at Police Station

Sirhali, District Tarn Taran. However, with the intervention of respectable

members of society, the matter was amicably resolved by way of

compromise Annexure P/2 dated 27.01.2021 without any threat, pressure,

coercion or undue influence and respondent No. 2 having no objection if
1 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [2]

FIR No.03 dated 02.01.2020, registered under Sections 498-A, IPC at Police

Station Sirhali, District Tarn Taran was quashed.

3. Learned counsel contends that pursuant to the order of this

Court dated 12.02.2021, statement of the parties were recorded by the

learned trial Court and after recording of statement of the parties, report

dated 26.02.2021 was forwarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st

Class, Tarn Taran, of the parties having made a statement of having

compromised the matter voluntarily, without any pressure coercion or undue

influence and of the respondents having no objection if FIR No.03 dated

02.01.2020, registered under Sections 498-A, IPC at Police Station Sirhali,

District Tarn Taran, and all pending proceedings in respect thereto were

quashed on the basis of compromise. Likewise, the Investigating Officer,

suffered a statement identifying the complainant / respondent No.2 as also of

their being five accused in the FIR, no accused having been declared a

proclaimed offender, of petitioner No. 2 having been arrested, there being no

other FIR registered against the accused persons, challan had not been

presented in Court and no cross case was pending between the parties. On

the basis of statements as referred to above, the learned JM, Tarn Taran

Gurdaspur, submitted report that the compromise appeared to be genuine

and voluntary etc.

4. Learned AAG, Punjab, as well as learned counsel for

respondent Nos. 2 & 3 admit amicable settlement of the dispute between the

parties in terms of compromise Annexure P/2 dated, and

submit that in view of the statement by the parties before the learned JM,

Tarn Taran of the dispute having been amicably settled, they have no

objection if the FIR and all consequential proceedings in respect thereto are

quashed. 2 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [3]

5. Learned Counsel have referred to the decision of Hon’ble the

Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4)

RCR (Crl.) 543, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another

2003 (2) RCR (Criminal) 888 as well as Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court in

Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3)

RCR (Criminal) 1052. Relevant extract of the aforementioned decision’s is

reproduced as under :-

Extract of the decision in Gian Singh’s case (supra)

“57. The position that emerges from the above

discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the

High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or

complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is

distinct and different from the power given to a criminal

court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of

the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no

statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord

with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to

secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the

process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the

criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be

exercised where the offender and victim have settled their

dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of

each case and no category can be prescribed. However,

before exercise of such power, the High Court must have

due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime.

Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or

offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be

3 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [4]

fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s

family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such

offences are not private in nature and have serious

impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between

the victim and offender in relation to the offences under

special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the

offences committed by public servants while working in

that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for

quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences.

But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-

dominatingly civil flavor stand on different footing for

the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences

arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil,

partnership or such like transactions or the offences

arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the

family disputes where the wrong is basically private or

personal in nature and the parties have resolved their

entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may

quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the

compromise between the offender and victim, the

possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and

continuation of criminal case would put accused to great

oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be

caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite

full and complete settlement and compromise with the

victim. In other words, the High Court must consider

whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of

4 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [5]

justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or

continuation of the criminal proceeding would

tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement

and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and

whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate

that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to

the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court

shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal


Extract of the decision in B.S. Joshi’s case (supra)

“10. In State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy & Ors.

[(1977) 2 SCC 699], considering the scope of inherent

power of quashing under Section 482, this Court held

that in the exercise of this wholesome power, the High

Court is entitled to quash proceedings if it comes to the

conclusion that ends of justice so require. It was observed

that in a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame

prosecution, the very nature of the material on which the

structure of the prosecution rests and the like would

justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the

interest of justice and that the ends of justice are higher

than the ends of mere law though justice had got to be

administered according to laws made by the legislature.

This Court said that the compelling necessity for making

these observations is that without a proper realisation of

the object and purpose of the provision which seeks to

save the inherent powers of the High Court to do justice

5 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [6]

between the State and its subjects, it would be impossible

to appreciate the width and contours of that salient

jurisdiction. On facts, it was also noticed that there was

no reasonable likelihood of the accused being convicted

of the offence. What would happen to the trial of the case

where the wife does not support the imputations made in

the FIR of the type in question. As earlier noticed, now

she has filed an affidavit that the FIR was registered at

her instance due to temperamental differences and

implied imputations. There may be many reasons for not

supporting the imputations. It may be either for the

reason that she has resolved disputed with her husband

and his other family members and as a result thereof she

has again started living with her husband with whom she

earlier had differences or she has willingly parted

company and is living happily on her own or has married

someone else on earlier marriage having been dissolved

by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support the

prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such

eventuality, there would almost be no chance of

conviction. Would it then be proper to decline to exercise

power of quashing on the ground that it would be

permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable

offences. Answer clearly has to be in ‘negative’. It would,

however, be a different matter if the High Court on facts

declines the prayer for quashing for any valid reasons

including lack of bonafides. 6 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [7]

11. In Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & Ors. v.

Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre & Ors. [(1998) 1 SCC

692], it was held that while exercising inherent power of

quashing under Section 482, it is for the High Court to

take into consideration any special features which appear

in a particular case to consider whether it is expedient

and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to

continue. Where, in the opinion of the Court, chances of

an ultimate conviction are bleak and, therefore, no useful

purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal

prosecution to continue, the court may, while taking into

consideration the special facts of a case, also quash the


12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are

evident. It becomes the duty of the Court to encourage

genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

13. The observations made by the Court, though in a

slightly different context, in G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad &

Ors. [(2000) 3 SCC 693] are very apt for determining the

approach required to be kept in view in matrimonial

dispute by the courts, it was said that there has been an

outburst of matrimonial disputes in recent times.

Marriage is a sacred ceremony the main purpose of

which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life

and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes

suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions

resulting in commission of heinous crimes in which

7 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [8]

elders of the family are also involved with the result that

those who could have counselled and brought about

rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being

arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many

other reasons which need not be mentioned here for not

encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties

may ponder over their defaults and terminate their

disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of

fighting it out in a court of law where is takes years and

years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their

“young” days in chasing their “cases” in different courts.

14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing

Chapter XX-A containing Section 498A in the Indian

Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her

husband or by relatives of her husband. Sections 498A

was added with a view to punishing a husband and his

relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or

her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The

hyper-technical view would be counterproductive and

would act against interests of women and against the

object for which this provision was added. There is every

likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash

the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent

women from settling earlier. That is not the object of

Chapter XX-A of Indian Penal Code.”

Extract of the decision in Kulwinder Singh’s case

8 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [9]

“39. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine

qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul

of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the

Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in

turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then

it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have

their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant

matters, commercial transactions and other such matters

can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its

powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a

compromise, but this is not to say that the power is

limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid

rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in

the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict

eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up

during the course of a litigation.

40. The only inevitable conclusion from the above

discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the

Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court

under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to

matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide

power to quash the proceedings even in non-

compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under

Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse

of law and to secure the ends of justice.”

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through

the record. The law encourages amicable settlement of matrimonial litigation

9 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [10]

instead of the parties fighting it out in courts for years and in the process

losing out on the prime of their youth in chasing their “cases” in different

courts. Admittedly in the eventuality of compromise of a dispute, both sides

stand to gain as the compromise not only brings peace and harmony between

the parties, but also restores tranquility in society. Bringing an end to the

criminal case would enable the parties to move on and rebuild their life.

Besides, in the facts and circumstances of the case, ultimate chances of a

conviction are bleak. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served by

continuing the criminal prosecution. In the light of the position noted above

and to secure the ends of justice, I am of the considered view that there is no

impediment in the way of this Court in exercising its inherent powers under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings

emanating therefrom.

7. Accordingly, in the light of position noted above, the instant

petition is allowed. FIR No.03 dated 02.01.2020, registered under Section

498-A, IPC at Police Station Sirhali, District Tarn Taran, along with all

consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed qua the

petitioners. Parties are directed to adhere to the terms and conditions of the

compromise, Annexure P/2 dated 27.01.2021. Failure to adhere to the same

would not only render the defaulting party liable for proceedings under the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 but would also entitle the aggrieved party to

take out appropriate proceedings in respect thereto in accordance with law.

Petition allowed in the aforementioned terms.
(B.S. Walia)
March 05, 2021

Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No

10 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::
CRM-M-6758-2021 [11]

11 of 11
::: Downloaded on – 24-08-2021 18:44:02 :::


Leave a Reply

Sign In


Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.